Dunno how many Farkers are aware of Defiance (pretty much an MMO by Trion that plays like Borderlands and tied into a new Syfy show that will be lucky to last more than one season), but it's pre-order bonus was an in-game Dodge Challenger.

It would be forgivable if Nissan had say sponsored a green transportation pack add-on and some of the features of the expansion where Leafs and charging stations. Just the charging station though is laughable.

FTFA: A building that uses no power, water or people to operate, and produces no waste? No to mention it just spews happiness onto anything near it. This isn't a building, it's a magical artifact we should be sending teams to scientists to study

"Video games occasionally portray things that don't exist in the real world."

THX 1138:FTFA: A building that uses no power, water or people to operate, and produces no waste? No to mention it just spews happiness onto anything near it. This isn't a building, it's a magical artifact we should be sending teams to scientists to study

[media.tumblr.com image 200x150]

"Video games occasionally portray things that don't exist in the real world."

THX 1138:FTFA: A building that uses no power, water or people to operate, and produces no waste? No to mention it just spews happiness onto anything near it. This isn't a building, it's a magical artifact we should be sending teams to scientists to study

[media.tumblr.com image 200x150]

"Video games occasionally portray things that don't exist in the real world."

I believe the complaints are based upon a) the illogical nature of transportation requiring no resources, and b) a branded DLC that is unbalanced and essentially breaks the game. I am sure Nissan WANTED the stats of their branded object to be so favorable that EVERY player would want to build lots of them because they were such a gimmee.

(Had I purchased the game), I'd be ok with limited forms of advertising for real words companies. Say, a new building pack also changes a few in-game billboards with a Coca-Cola ad here and there, or every once and awhile, an office building has an Intel logo on its roof, giving it a cool, real world vibe (if displayed un-intrusively) while securing funding for better DLC. It's one of the few types of games where that would be appropriate, I think.

As it appears now, however, this is just tacky as hell. While cool and forward-thinking in principle, that building would still need some power (albeit less), a worker for maintenance and security, water for fire suppression, bathrooms, and sewers (even if it collected rain-water), and would generate some waste. Everything generates waste. That's what the landfill/recycling plant/organic composting facility/nanobot reprocessor is for.

The final straw with EA and anything they produce was the DLC for Dead Space 3: Awakening. 800 MS points for it (nearly $10), and it was an hour long. That's it. No substance, anything new, or any real challenge to it. No new weapons, armor, anything. Bullshiat.

Fark EA, fark Visceral Games, and any maker that goes along that path of "premium price, minimal content". I get it. You're in the business to make money, but keep pissing off people, EA. You've already lost a CEO due to your shenanigans, had massive retailers pull your shiatty game from their shelves when people couldn't play it, lie to consumers about your DRM schemes, and I will be more than happy to dance on your grave, right before I pilfer what I can from your corpse and pawn it to hopefully break even from the wasted money on the shiat you sell.

Eh....I'm fine with it. It's free, optional, unobtrusive, and adds a different building to the set. There's ads in tons of games that isn't an option. I think it'd be cool to throw down a Chik Fil A in a suburb or a Wells Fargo downtown.

"Well, sure, we had advertisements, but not in our games. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines and movies and at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and T-shirts and written in the sky. But not in games. No, sir-ee!"

Ann Coulter's Diiick:Eh....I'm fine with it. It's free, optional, unobtrusive, and adds a different building to the set. There's ads in tons of games that isn't an option. I think it'd be cool to throw down a Chik Fil A in a suburb or a Wells Fargo downtown.

"Well, sure, we had advertisements, but not in our games. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines and movies and at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and T-shirts and written in the sky. But not in games. No, sir-ee!"

I don't think it's the advertising that is the problem, it's the illogical nature of the object in the game. If this thing drew the same amount of power (or even something like 2/3rds in order to make it more appealing to use than a similar non sponsored object) it would be fine.

Not to mention everyone is still a bit sore at EA for all their missteps lately, so any chance for some schadenfreude...

Mike_LowELL:The Bestest: Realism is often a key selling point in simulation games.

The best video games offer an escape from reality, not to be reminded of it.

That right there is is an opinion. Simulation games strive for realism and have lots of fans who like the realism aspect. It's debatable that Sim City is a true simulation game but if we assume that it is, then breaking the simulation is bad form. People actually pay money to drive a train in as realistic a way as possible. It's not my cup of tea but that's what they like and it's no business of mine.

Egoy3k:That right there is is an opinion. Simulation games strive for realism and have lots of fans who like the realism aspect. It's debatable that Sim City is a true simulation game but if we assume that it is, then breaking the simulation is bad form. People actually pay money to drive a train in as realistic a way as possible. It's not my cup of tea but that's what they like and it's no business of mine.

I don't have a problem with people playing simulation games, but if I go down the list, there's no doubt in my mind that games like F-Zero GX and Burnout are better racing games than Gran Turismo and games like NBA Street and NBA Jam are better than NBA2K. The beauty of video games, like most media, is that they can offer us worlds, people, and situations that are completely different and distinct from anything that we know of in our physical realm.

And I'm not arguing that SimCity constitutes a "simulation" game in the same sense that Madden is a simulation of football. I'm just responding to the post in a general manner. I have no issues with SimCity.

LockeOak:SlothB77: scottydoesntknow: A charging station that doesn't use power?!

came to say this. what is the power source they are using to to charge electronic cars with, rainbows? Last i checked, you plug those suckers in to an outlet.

Based on the image it uses solar panels that are about 10000% efficient.

It doesn't take gigawats to charge an electric battery. Just Like, 2 cents of electricity. A modern solar panel could easily pull enough in several times over on your average day, and still have some saved for night.

The Bestest:Dunno how many Farkers are aware of Defiance (pretty much an MMO by Trion that plays like Borderlands and tied into a new Syfy show that will be lucky to last more than one season), but it's pre-order bonus was an in-game Dodge Challenger.

Don't care. Jaime Murray. Hot. Will watch whatever she's in, for however long it's on. Gal has a great sense of humor too - follow her on Twitter.

ThreadSinger:I'd be ok with limited forms of advertising for real words companies.

I am absolutely not OK with this. For two reasons:

1. I paid for the game. I don't want to see ads. ANY ads. Period.2. Creep. You're a damn fool if you think this stops with "a few in-game billboards." Once they get it in their head that it's acceptable to slip in a little advertisement here and there, they'll escalate and escalate until every surface is plastered in ads.

Honest Bender:2. Creep. You're a damn fool if you think this stops with "a few in-game billboards." Once they get it in their head that it's acceptable to slip in a little advertisement here and there, they'll escalate and escalate until every surface is plastered in ads.

Honest Bender : 1. I paid for the game. I don't want to see ads. ANY ads. Period.

I would be OK with this if

1) The ads reduced the overall cost of the game. IE, instead of $60, they sell it for $40 or something. Hell, put a sticker on the box saying that part of the cost was paid for by such and such advertiser.

lordargent:LockeOak: Based on the image it uses solar panels that are about 10000% efficient.

It can store the solar power in batteries, and then charge charge vehicles from the batteries.

You know, when one of the only five leaf owners in the entire city of millions decides to use the charging station.

A Nissan Leaf battery capacity is 24kWh. A standard solar panel is 250W (max per hour) and about 1.5 m^2 in area. Therefore to charge one Leaf per hour you would need 96 panels, or about 150 m^2. That station appears (generously) to have about 5m x 15m of solar panels for 75 m^2. Again being generous and assuming 8 hours of sunlight every day, it could charge a maximum of 4 Leafs per day, less than the number of fracking charging stations.

Hellgate: London had a subscription fee and advertising. That was utter bullshiat. I'm principally opposed to in-game adverts in games, but if you're going to do it, at least do it right. I'm not paying for a damn advertisement, so if you're going to put them in there they better not be intrusive and I better get a benefit from them.

Among all the horrible, outrageous things EA has done (and continues to do) this is pretty low on the list.

Of course, I'm not buying any EA games ever again so it really doesn't affect me anyway.